Steensn, actually, you appear to be the ignorant one here. It's obvious that you have been brainwashed by your EnviroNazi overlords and masters because you keep repeating their propaganda, bullshit, and lies. Then again, I wouldn't expect anything less from you.

The truth is that renewable green energy can not survive without government subsidies and mandates. The truth is that green energy increases the costs of electricity for all consumers. The truth is that green energy can not replace conventional sources. The truth is that green energy is subsidized at over 50 times more per KW than coal or gas. The truth is that green energy hasn't produced as many jobs as promised. The truth is that green energy isn't as reliable as fossil fuels for electricity generation.

I'm sure you're gonna dispute all this like you usually do, but it will be nothing more than your standard propaganda, rhetoric, and lies.

Despite the growing Solyndra scandal, yesterday the Department of Energy approved $1 billion in new loans to green energy companies -- including a $737 million loan guarantee to a company known as SolarReserve:

SolarReserve LLC, a closely held renewable energy developer, received a $737 million U.S. Energy Department loan guarantee to build a solar-thermal project in Nevada.

The 110-megawatt Crescent Dunes project, near Tonopah, Nevada, will use the sun’s heat to create steam that drives a turbine, the agency said today in a e-mailed statement. SolarReserve is based in Santa Monica, California.

On SolarReserve's website is a list of "investment partners," including the "PCG Clean Energy & Technology Fund (East) LLC." As blogger American Glob quickly discovered, PCG's number two is none other than "Ronald Pelosi, a San Francisco political insider and financial industry polymath who happens to be the brother-in-law of Nancy Pelosi, the Minority Leader of the United States House of Representatives."

But wait... there's more! One of SolarReserve's other investment partners is Argonaut Private Equity:

Steve Mitchell and Argonaut Private Equity might have a chance to recoup some of their losses in the Solyndra debacle now that the Department of Energy has given a $737 million dollar loan guarantee to a company backed by Argonaut that also lists Mitchell among its board of directors.

Mitchell served on the Solyndra LLC Board of Directors. He also serves as Managing Director for Argonaut Private Equity, a company that invested in Solyndra through the LLCs parent company. After Solyndra declared bankruptcy, two Democratic members of the U.S. House asked that Mitchell testify about Solyndra. Though he has not appeared before Congress, he has "been asked to provide documents to Congress" pertaining to Solyndra.

And for good measure, it's also noteworthy that Obama is about to hold a big money fundraiser at the home of Tom Carnahan in St. Louis:

Carnahan, a member of the prominent Missouri Democratic family, has been tapped by the Obama campaign as its chief Missouri fundraiser. He is chairman of the board of Wind Capital Group, a wind energy company that makes it corporate headquarters in St. Louis. He formerly was president and CEO of the company.

Last year, Wind Capital's Lost Creek Farm facility in northwest Missouri received a $107 million tax credit from the Treasury Department, among many such wind operations receiving support from from stimulus funds.

Tom Carnahan is the son of former Missouri governor Mel Carnahan and former U.S. senator Jean Carnahan. He's also the brother of current Missouri secretary of state, Robin Carnahan.

It's increasingly hard to tell the government's green jobs subsidies apart from the Democrats' friends and family rewards program.

Steensn, actually, you appear to be the ignorant one here. It's obvious that you have been brainwashed by your EnviroNazi overlords and masters because you keep repeating their propaganda, bullshit, and lies. Then again, I wouldn't expect anything less from you.

The truth is that renewable green energy can not survive without government subsidies and mandates. The truth is that green energy increases the costs of electricity for all consumers. The truth is that green energy can not replace conventional sources. The truth is that green energy is subsidized at over 50 times more per KW than coal or gas. The truth is that green energy hasn't produced as many jobs as promised. The truth is that green energy isn't as reliable as fossil fuels for electricity generation.

I'm sure you're gonna dispute all this like you usually do, but it will be nothing more than your standard propaganda, rhetoric, and lies.

Can't address the data... attack the person. Case rested... keep creating Red Herrings and not addressing the apples to apples comparison. If you want to complain about governmental support for something and then support a tehcnology that received more government help than who youa re currently complaining about; no matter how much you try and distract anyone from the truth I'm not going to be fooled with the red herring data.

Dollar for dollar not taking into account anything but cost to run a power plant with the system in place and no renewable subsidies G&O will continue to be a cheaper option thanks to the huge kickoff in gov't funding to mature them in their infancy stages and long maturing process over the past 100+ years. No one is denying that... what you are saying is that the future of a energy source is only important if it can here and now beat the compitition with no assistance. The issue is that you then continue to ignore the preceeding cases where each neergy source you support required MORE startup help than renewables are getting... totally oblivious to comparing apples ot apples.

So ditract from the conversation and ignore what really happened in O&G, nuclear, etc's time during infancy... ignore the fact they are what they are only because of more assistance from the gov't than renewables is currently getting... ignore reality in general.... and keep making up ignorant arguments purposefully ignoring what happened and how these industries got their start and the gov'ts impact on that.

Sly's world must be nice to live in... it can be whatever he wants it to be...

This is hilarious coming from the person that has used "stupid", "idiotic", "dumb", "silly", "nonsense", "asinine", "jerk", "jackle", "ignorant", "nonsensical", "fool", "folly", "dishonest", "hogwash", "douche", and "obnoxious" in this single thread to describe wjb, Wags, njroar, and myself. Regularjoe12 attempted to set you straight on the previous page, but you obviously didn't listen. I could suggest that you shouldn't throw stones in glass houses, but I suspect that you wouldn't listen to that advice either.

As for your "red herring" comment, you do realize that this thread is about Obama favoring his friends/donors over the American taxpayer, don't you? Therefore, pretty much everything you've said in this thread has been a "red herring". And I suppose going back to 1918 to look at oil subsidies isn't a "red herring" in your world either, is it? Look in the mirror before attempting to project the next time, will ya?

Notice that I haven't used any smilies in this post? I only do that when I'm joking around and/or having fun. Hint for the feeble-minded - I'm doing neither right now.

_________________

September 29th, 2011, 5:30 pm

steensn

RIP Killer

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pmPosts: 13429

Re: Report: White House tried to rush Solyndra loan

slybri19 wrote:

steensn wrote:

Can't address the data... attack the person. Case rested...

This is hilarious coming from the person that has used "stupid", "idiotic", "dumb", "silly", "nonsense", "asinine", "jerk", "jackle", "ignorant", "nonsensical", "fool", "folly", "dishonest", "hogwash", "douche", and "obnoxious" in this single thread to describe wjb, Wags, njroar, and myself. Regularjoe12 attempted to set you straight on the previous page, but you obviously didn't listen. I could suggest that you shouldn't throw stones in glass houses, but I suspect that you wouldn't listen to that advice either.

No, I called your POINTS stupid, silly, dumb, etc. accept for when someone was acting like a "douche." So again, stop exaggerating things.

slybri19 wrote:

As for your "red herring" comment, you do realize that this thread is about Obama favoring his friends/donors over the American taxpayer, don't you? Therefore, pretty much everything you've said in this thread has been a "red herring". And I suppose going back to 1918 to look at oil subsidies isn't a "red herring" in your world either, is it? Look in the mirror before attempting to project the next time, will ya?

Someone brought it up, I addressed it. Sorry... I went off topic with everyone else. Someone stated they couldn't survive without subsidies, I provided data that if that was a reason something wasn't a good future energy source then you can say O&G and nuclear are not good energy sources based on that logic. Again,if that is off topic I'll take responcability with everyone else.

slybri19 wrote:

Notice that I haven't used any smilies in this post? I only do that when I'm joking around and/or having fun. Hint for the feeble-minded - I'm doing neither right now.

Good, then now I understand you amazingly just not willing to compare apples to apples or simply don't get it.

This is hilarious coming from the person that has used "stupid", "idiotic", "dumb", "silly", "nonsense", "asinine", "jerk", "jackle", "ignorant", "nonsensical", "fool", "folly", "dishonest", "hogwash", "douche", and "obnoxious" in this single thread to describe wjb, Wags, njroar, and myself. Regularjoe12 attempted to set you straight on the previous page, but you obviously didn't listen. I could suggest that you shouldn't throw stones in glass houses, but I suspect that you wouldn't listen to that advice either.

And the list would be much much longer if you counted all the misspelled attacks.

I have no dog in this fight, just wanted to drop in and say I'm glad that others are calling steensn out for what he is, a wannabe bully. Even when he has a good point to make--and he does on occasion--he can't, either due to incompetence/illiteracy or by diminishing himself in the way he addresses those who disagree with him. The result is a lot of ruined, mindless threads. Listen more, speak less, little fella.

Thanks for the comment, fetumpsh. It's obviously apparent to everyone other than steensn just how ridiculous he has become since moving out to Cali. I don't know if it's the water out there or the heavy liberal influence, but the guy has lost his freaking mind. Worse yet, he's absolutely clueless about how he is perceived by others. It's too bad. I used to like the guy.

Now, I'm gonna address steensn one last time in this thread before moving on. In the early 1900's, the government subsidized oil, gas, coal etc. because they wanted to provide electricity to ALL Americans to improve the infrastructure. That was a worthy and noble effort.

Today, virtually every American has access to electricity, so the same conditions do not apply. There is absolutely NO reason to subsidize alternative energy when reliable energy is already in place. For steensn to compare the two entirely different situations like he did, is EXTREMELY disingenuous and he ought to be ashamed of himself. Talk about red herrings.

Getting back on topic:

National Review wrote:

The Solyndra Mess Gets Messier

September 29, 2011 3:59 P.M. By Andrew Stiles Yesterday, the Department of Energy announced that it had approved new loan guarantees worth more than $1 billion for two solar energy companies:

DOE announced a $737 million loan guarantee to help finance construction of the Crescent Dunes Solar Energy Project, a 110-megawatt solar-power-generating facility in Nye County, Nev. The project is sponsored by Tonopah Solar, a subsidiary of California-based SolarReserve.

The Energy Department said the project will result in 600 construction jobs and 45 permanent jobs…

The Energy Department also announced that it had finalized a separate $337 million loan guarantee to Sempra Energy for a 150-megawatt photovoltaic solar-generation project in Arizona.

The project will result in 300 construction jobs, DOE said.

Let’s see. Simple math, as the president would say, gives us a grand total of $1.074 billion spent to create, according to the DOE, just 45 permanent jobs. That’s about $24 million spent for every permanent job created. As far as the DOE’s “green” loans program is concerned, that’s par for the course. By any reasonable standard, it’s a horribly inefficient way to spend the taxpayers’ money.

With respect to Solyndra, the DOE shelled out $535 million to a company that happened to list a major Democratic fundraiser (George Kaiser) as a primary investor. Could there be a similar connection to any of these other companies? Of course there could.

As American Glob reports, Solar Reserve, the California-based enterprise at the heart of the $737 million loan guarantee mentioned above, is an “investment partner” with the Pacific Corporate Group. The executive director of PCG is Ron Pelosi, brother-in-law of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.).

But that’s not all. Solar Reserve is also investment partners with Argonaut Private Equity, an arm of the (George) Kaiser Family Foundation that was a major investor in Solyndra and was involved in negotiations with the DOE to restructure the failed company’s loan agreement. That agreement would ultimately give Argonaut and other private investors priority status over the American taxpayer with respect to the first $75 million recovered in the event of Solyndra’s collapse. As Republicans argued at a recent House committee hearing, this arrangement was almost certainly a violation of federal statute.

Argonaut’s managing director, Steven Mitchell, served on Solyndra’s board when the restructuring took place, and reportedly still serves on the company’s board. He is also listed as a “board participant” at Solar Reserve:

Mitchell owes his position at Solyndra and Solar Reserve, apparently, to the fact that his primary employer, Argonaut Private Equity, invested in both companies. Mitchell holds the title of Managing Director for Argonaut Private Equity. After Solyndra declared bankruptcy, two Democratic members of the U.S. House asked that House Subcommittee call Mitchell to testify about Solyndra. Though he has not appeared before Congress, he has “been asked to provide documents to Congress” pertaining to Solyndra.

These connections certainly suggest that the Obama administration was not merely “felony dumb,” in the words of Rep. Brian Bilbray (R., Calif.), in its handling of the DOE loan program, but consciously corrupt. And at the moment, there are far too many questions that remain unanswered.

Newly released communications regarding the loan approval for Solyndra, the now failed California solar energy company, show direct intervention by an Energy Department adviser and Obama campaign fundraiser, and raise new questions of possible involvement by Rahm Emanuel and the President. As more is learned, it becomes increasingly clear that the Administration used the Stimulus, and specifically the green energy loan program, as a campaign slush fund to distribute billions of dollars like party favors to supporters and to grandstand for re-election to a perceived constituency.

By mid-2009, the White House was obsessing to make headlines with an announcement of a $535 million loan to Solyndra as the first of many green energy loans in the DOE's pipeline that would be funded by the recently passed Stimulus. Initially the staff tried to schedule an announcement by Obama, and later as approval was delayed, they shifted to the Vice-President.

"Ron said this morning that the POTUS definitely wants to do this (or Rahm definitely wants the POTUS to do this?)," a White House staffer told an Obama scheduler on August 17, 2009 according to The Washington Post. This was a reference to Ron Klain, Chief of Staff at that time for the Vice-President. "Rahm" refers to Rahm Emanuel, Chief of Staff to the President.

The Solyndra loan was finally approved in September 2009 over a plethora of warnings and objections from within the Department of Energy, the Office of Management and Budget, and numerous private and solar industry experts. Following the company's collapse, questions have haunted the White House of possible political corruption and cronyism as investigations revealed that executives and investors in Solyndra were also significant donors to the Obama campaign with repeated access to top White House officials. In addition, critics charge that the administration disregarded objective financial analysis, and blindly threw billions of taxpayer dollars at green energy companies like Solyndra with little chance of success.

Oblivious to the warnings from his own White House advisers that the company was in serious trouble and would run out of cash in September, 2010 (and it did), Obama visited the Solyndra headquarters in May 2010 and hailed it as "leading the way toward a brighter and more prosperous future."

The Washington Post is also reporting that Steve Spinner, a major Obama 2008 campaign fundraiser, later appointed by the White House to "advise" the Department of Energy regarding the green energy loan program, applied heavy pressure on DOE officials for approval of the $535 million loan guarantee for Solyndra.

"How (expletive) hard is this? What is he waiting for?" Spinner wrote to a DOE official by email on Aug. 28, 2009 questioning why the Solyndra application was not already approved. "I have the OVP (Office of the Vice-President) and the WH (White House) breathing down my neck on this. They are getting itchy to get involved."

Later the same day, Spinner asked the same DOE official to "walk over there and force him to give you the answer."

In another exchange just minutes after getting an email from Solyndra, Spinner fired off a message to the DOE officials asking if the White House budget office (OMB) had completed their review. "Any word on OMB? Solyndra's getting nervous," he wrote.

The loan was pushed through, and on September 4, 2009 Joe Biden announced by video link the deal as the "unprecedented investment this Administration is making in renewable energy and exactly what the Recovery Act (Stimulus) is all about."

Spinner's involvement is in direct contradiction of previous representations by the DOE. Spinner had specifically recused himself from the Solyndra application because his wife's law firm, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, represented the company on the DOE loan and pocketed $2.4 million in legal fees for their efforts.

The AP reports that an administration official, speaking on condition that he not be identified because of ongoing investigations in the evolving scandal, said that Spinner "clearly was actively involved in facilitating between DOE and OMB."

Joe Biden was partially correct – unfortunately. Solyndra is typical of what the billions of Stimulus dollars tossed around by the Obama Administration was "all about" – about waste, cronyism, and corruption. The taxpayer is on the hook for $535 million, but before this is done some once big shots in Washington will deservedly be cut down to size.

With the Solyndra scandal already beyond the boiling point, the Department of Energy pushed through nearly $6 billion more in green energy loans in the final hours of the maligned program. One of those was to another California based company, SunPower, who just three weeks earlier had publicly announced plans to build its 320,000 square foot manufacturing plant in Mexico.

The Mexico plant will produce solar panels to be shipped back to California for a proposed "solar ranch" in San Luis Obispo County that will have a grand total of 15 permanent presumably American jobs. That works out to $82.6 million per job created.

Like Solyndra, SunPower is in a perilous financial condition. SunPower's stock price has tumbled 94% from the once glory-days of 2007 when the company was worth $13 billion. Based on July 2011 financial reports, the current market capitalization of the company is $800 million and it owes $820 million in debt. You can find a further explanation of what that means in the dictionary under "insolvent."

In addition to financial woes, SunPower and its officers are defendants in a federal lawsuit in which the plaintiffs include the Austin (Texas) Police Retirement System, the Arkansas Teachers Retirement System and various other institutional investors. The lawsuit alleges that SunPower deceived "the investing public by making false statements contrary to nonpublic information known to the insiders." In addition, there have been a number of lawsuits filed against SunPower in California state courts alleging "gross mismanagement, breach of fiduciary responsibility, unjust enrichment and abuse of control," according to Human Events.com who broke the story earlier this week.

The "unjust enrichment" referred to above is illuminating. On April 28, SunPower announced the sale of 60% the company to French owned, Total Oil. The deal was struck at a price of $23.25 per share. On May 24 SunPower CEO Thomas H. Werner exercised a stock option for 428,343 shares at $3.30 per share. Subsequently on June 15 – the day the deal with Total Oil closed – Werner sold 478,084 shares at the $23.25 strike price and pocketed $11,115,453. The stock price has tumbled ever since hitting bottom October 4 at $6.60, just days after the announced $1.24 billion loan from the DOE. As of this writing, SunPower Class A stock is trading at $8.31.

Despite the monumental financial and legal problems in addition to the publicly announced plans to set up manufacturing operations to Mexico, SunPower did have a very large ace up its sleeve. Just like Solyndra, the company had cultivated friendships with very powerful Democrat green energy supporters.

Rep. George Miller (D-CA), the top ranking Democrat on the House Education and Workforce Committee and a member of the Democrats' Leadership in the House has been an unabashed cheerleader for SunPower – and coincidentally, his son is also SunPower's Washington lobbyist. Although SunPower didn't score a visit from Barack Obama or Joe Biden as Solyndra did, Miller managed to showcase the company to Secretary of Interior Ken Salazar who said "the path to a clean energy economy starts here." Well, not exactly Mr. Secretary – it will start 350 miles to the south; in Mexico.

The $1.24 billion for SunPower came through the DOE's 1705 loan program that was funded with Stimulus dollars – the brain child of Barack Obama that was supposed to create 3.5 million American jobs. If you're wondering how in the world a financially troubled company, mired in litigation, with majority interest owned by a foreign company, manages to get a $1.24 billion loan to keep it on life support – well, you are not alone.

Obama, George Miller, and the Democrats used the Stimulus to their full personal advantage, and particularly the green energy dollars. The President says that "overall it (the green energy loan program) is doing well." They call it Stimulus – but they used it as a Campaign Slush Fund – and it stinks.

WASHINGTON – Treasury Department officials testified Friday that they've never in their careers seen the government handle a loan quite like the Energy Department handled the $528 million in taxpayer dollars that was lent to failed solar firm Solyndra.

At a tense hearing on Capitol Hill, two Treasury officials acknowledged that the government's restructuring of the loan earlier this year was unusual, if not unprecedented. Through that process, Solyndra investors, not taxpayers, were put at the front of the line for recovering money in case of bankruptcy.

Gary Burner, chief financial officer of the Treasury Federal Financing Bank responsible for the loan and a 28-year veteran of the Treasury Department, said he's never heard of a case where private money was prioritized ahead of taxpayer money in a loan.

Gary Grippo, deputy assistant secretary at the department, said he was never personally "involved" in a case like that.

The two were questioned as Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce oversight subcommittee tried to bare warning signs that were popping up inside the Obama administration as the Solyndra loan situation developed.

Panel Chairman Rep. Cliff. Stearns, R-Fla., charged that some senior officials inside the administration knew the loan was a "bad bet that was destined to fail," but were ignored by the Department of Energy.

"Recent emails ... clearly show that numerous members of the Obama administration from the most senior levels of the West Wing down to the career professionals at (the Office of Management and Budget) and (Department of Energy) knew that Solyndra was a bad bet that was destined to fail," Stearns said.

Newly released emails show that the Treasury Department was concerned that the loan restructuring, approved earlier this year, could violate federal law.

One August 2011 email from a Treasury official obtained by Fox Business Network stated that federal regulations say the taxpayer money "shall not be subordinate" to other investments. "I will bet a quarter that the DOE lawyers have some kind of theory on how whatever restructuring they have done and whatever they are considering doing does not violate these requirements. Can't wait to hear it," the official said.

Another August email questioned why investors were even considering putting more money into the company. "I think DOE should be thinking through whether the proposed deal is just giving the investors more time to extract more value from the firm before bankruptcy," the Treasury official said.

The GOP lawmakers cited other emails showing that Mary Miller, an assistant treasury secretary, said the restructuring deal could violate the law because it put investors' interests ahead of taxpayers. Miller told a top White House budget official that she had advised that any proposed restructuring be reviewed by the Justice Department before it was approved.

"To our knowledge that has never happened," Miller wrote in an Aug. 17 memo to the White House Office of Management and Budget.

She said Treasury had asked the Energy Department for briefings on Solyndra's finances and restructuring terms since July 2010 but only heard back from the White House budget office.

Under questioning from a Democratic lawmaker, Grippo acknowledged Friday that Treasury cannot and did not render a legal opinion on the restructuring.

At times, the hearing was a forum for Democrats and Republicans to trade charges about the nature of the Solyndra probe itself. Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., and others complained that Energy Department officials were not at the hearing to give their side. Waxman also said the GOP was withholding a vital memo with Energy Department information.

"We're only going to get one side of the story," Waxman said, accusing Republicans of conducting an unfair investigation while trying to "maintain our addiction to fossil fuels."

Administration officials have defended the loan restructuring, saying that without an infusion of cash earlier this year, Solyndra would likely have faced immediate bankruptcy, putting more than 1,000 people out of work.

Damien LaVera, a spokesman for the Energy Department, said Thursday that the loan restructuring was legal.

"Based on a careful analysis of the terms of the restructuring, the career officials in the DOE loan program determined that the restructuring was legal and that it did not require Justice Department review," LaVera said.

Energy Department officials say the statute cited by the Treasury Department requires the Justice Department to approve a loan "compromise," in which a borrower is allowed to pay back less than the full amount of the loan. That was not the case in the Solyndra deal, they said.

And while one portion of the law makes clear that a federal debt cannot be subordinate to other financing at the time of the loan, another section provides officials with broad authority to take action to protect the taxpayer in an emergency situation, they said.

Energy Secretary Steven Chu approved the restructuring in February.

Even with the federal help, Solyndra closed its doors Aug. 31 and let all of its workers go.

Emails released last week show a wide disagreement among officials at the Energy Department, Treasury and Office of Management and Budget about Solyndra. Officials at the latter two agencies raised questions about the quality of the DOE's loan-vetting process and the special treatment Solyndra was given as its finances deteriorated.

The Fremont, Calif.-based company was the first renewable-energy company to receive a loan guarantee under a stimulus-law program to encourage green energy and was frequently touted by the Obama administration as a model. Obama visited the company's Silicon Valley headquarters last year, and Vice President Joe Biden spoke by satellite at its groundbreaking.

Not even Solyndra’s asset auction will help taxpayers recoup any money October 21, 2011 by Tina Korbe

Early next month, Solyndra will auction off its assets – including thousands of pieces of office equipment, computers, power tools, assembly line machinery and even solar panels. That should help taxpayers recoup their money — money that should never have been loaned to Solyndra in the first place. Right? Wrong.

Scribe’s Lachlan Markay explains that the proceeds of the auction will all go to … private investors.

DOE has developed an unprecedented interpretation of the law to allow Solyndra’s private investors to recoup $75 million of their investment before taxpayers are repaid.

Heritage Global Partners, which is conducting the auction, told Scribe that the money raised from the upcoming auction “will not be anywhere near” $75 million, meaning the proceeds will go entirely towards repaying Solyndra’s private investors.

That’s highly atypical. According to testimony from two Treasury Department officials, before Solyndra, taxpayers have never been subordinated to private investors in the repayment of a government loan.

Let’s think this through for a minute. Why was Solyndra presumably picked to be the poster child for the government’s foolish loan guarantee program in the first place? I seem to recall some overlap between Solyndra investors and Obama donors. So, naturally, the DOE would want to repay those donors before they repay the taxpayers whose money they irresponsibly invested. This pay-to-play scandal is so transparent I barely know what to say. Yet, Obama continues to defend his decision — no less than he continues to defend Eric Holder’s ability to preside over an investigation into Fast and Furious. Shameless.

Regularjoe12, if you give a donation to the Obama campaign, I'm sure that he'll hook you up with as many solar panels as you want. Hell, he will probably subsidize them for you too!

_________________

October 23rd, 2011, 11:07 am

frok

Varsity Captain

Joined: August 9th, 2004, 1:51 amPosts: 309Location: kalamazoo,mi

Re: Report: White House tried to rush Solyndra loan

slybri19 wrote:

Thanks, Obama. The taxpayers get screwed again:

Hot Air wrote:

Not even Solyndra’s asset auction will help taxpayers recoup any money October 21, 2011 by Tina Korbe

Early next month, Solyndra will auction off its assets – including thousands of pieces of office equipment, computers, power tools, assembly line machinery and even solar panels. That should help taxpayers recoup their money — money that should never have been loaned to Solyndra in the first place. Right? Wrong.

Scribe’s Lachlan Markay explains that the proceeds of the auction will all go to … private investors.

DOE has developed an unprecedented interpretation of the law to allow Solyndra’s private investors to recoup $75 million of their investment before taxpayers are repaid.

Heritage Global Partners, which is conducting the auction, told Scribe that the money raised from the upcoming auction “will not be anywhere near” $75 million, meaning the proceeds will go entirely towards repaying Solyndra’s private investors.

That’s highly atypical. According to testimony from two Treasury Department officials, before Solyndra, taxpayers have never been subordinated to private investors in the repayment of a government loan.

Let’s think this through for a minute. Why was Solyndra presumably picked to be the poster child for the government’s foolish loan guarantee program in the first place? I seem to recall some overlap between Solyndra investors and Obama donors. So, naturally, the DOE would want to repay those donors before they repay the taxpayers whose money they irresponsibly invested. This pay-to-play scandal is so transparent I barely know what to say. Yet, Obama continues to defend his decision — no less than he continues to defend Eric Holder’s ability to preside over an investigation into Fast and Furious. Shameless.

Obama will probably rush the investigation, when his time in office is almost up, have them sentenced then pardon them as he is leaving office. THis way all of his friends get paid, and spend little time if any in Jail.

frok

_________________I feel more like I do now than when I first got here.

October 23rd, 2011, 11:21 am

regularjoe12

Def. Coordinator – Teryl Austin

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 amPosts: 4216Location: Davison Mi

Re: Report: White House tried to rush Solyndra loan

slybri19 wrote:

Regularjoe12, if you give a donation to the Obama campaign, I'm sure that he'll hook you up with as many solar panels as you want. Hell, he will probably subsidize them for you too!

Well then im out..Im the type of guy he taxes to death...Maybe if I quit my job and live on the welfare I can afford to donate to the cause...